* I’ve already given my brief take to subscribers, but here’s the full polling memo from Normington Petts on behalf of the Democratic Governors Association…

• Incumbent Republican Governor Bruce Rauner remains extremely vulnerable with every measure of his political support below 40%.

• Rauner’s veto of the budget has worsened his standing with voters.

o His favorable rating has declined since January, dropping from an already meager 33%-44% to 33%-48%.

o His job rating as governor is also lower, falling from 36%-58% to 34%-63%.

o Against a generic Democrat, Rauner trails 37% to 49%, a wider margin than the 35%-45% deficit we measured in January.

• Rauner’s job rating on “the state budget” is a devastating 29%-65%, with a majority (50%) saying Rauner has done a “poor” job on that issue.

Not only do the common measures of political strength show weakness, but under the surface there are signs of significant trouble for Rauner’s re-election chances. Since January, the percentage of voters who rate the job he is doing as governor as “not so good” or “poor” has increased from 58% to 63% (+5) across the Prairie State. In what should be alarming for Rauner supporters, Rauner’s negative job rating stands at 61% and has increased 10 points among white voters age 60 and older since January (61% negative, +10). Rauner has seen negative increases in other key demographic and geographic groups including in the Chicago media market (68% negative, +8), among Independents (65% negative, +8) and in the Collars (54% negative, +4).

Rauner is not just losing ground with those critical constituencies, but there are signs that Rauner’s low standing among his own partisans combined with the intensity of dislike from Democrats could create a disproportionate turnout scenario that further damages his re-election chances. Democrats rate the job Rauner is doing as governor at 8%-89%, with 66% saying he is doing a “poor” job. That level of intensity among Democrats is met with tepid support from Republicans who give him a job rating of 68%-29%, with just 17% saying he is doing an “excellent” job. That is a nearly 4 to 1 ratio of hate to love. These kinds of ratings create a plausible scenario of unenthused Republicans staying home and angry Democrats coming out in larger than expected numbers, which results in a wave across Illinois that will affect every candidate in 2018. Rauner is on track to be an albatross around the neck of GOP candidates up and down the ballot.

* Chart…

* Methodology…

(L)ive interview telephone survey conducted among 600 likely voters in Illinois on behalf of the Democratic Governors Association. Respondents were reached on both landlines and mobile phones. Interviews were conducted July 18-20, 2017. The sampling error for this survey is ±4%. There are references to a poll conducted January 3-5, 2017 with the same sample size and methodology.

* Pritzker campaign response…

Today, the Pritzker campaign released the following statement in response to a new poll showing Bruce Rauner’s poll numbers underwater after failing to do his job, vetoing the state budget, and causing lasting damage across our state.

“Bruce Rauner is the most vulnerable governor in the country and it’s clear that Illinois voters are ready for a real leader like JB,” said Pritzker campaign manager Anne Caprara. “While Rauner continues to blame everyone but himself for his failures, Illinois families know the truth. Rauner created a 736-day budget crisis, drove the bond rating to the edge of junk status, and is now holding funding for schoolchildren hostage to force his reckless, special interest agenda. Our campaign is committed to holding Rauner accountable for his callous disregard for the people of this state. This should be a wake-up call for anyone who thinks it’s politically wise to follow the governor’s polling numbers off a cliff.”

       

73 Comments - Annonin' - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:16 am: yikes…if President Cullerton thought GovJunk was havin’ a bad month yesterday just think of how whacky he will be today. And he “lost Foxconn” If we had just kept Denny Hastert as Speaker….. - A Jack - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:21 am: And perhaps if the Governor hadn’t created such a gigantic bill backlog, we could have offered Foxconn some incentives to move to Illinois. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:21 am: “But, but, but… it’s better than Madigan” I dunno which is the tougher climb, the less than 40% on approval, or whittling down the disapproval from the 60+%. How will Rauner’s new “Team America”, with a spokesperson liking comparisons to WWII Germany and HB40 and after Rauner vetoing everything, including DHS, when a Director thinks chiming in against someone who aided in an override to fund DHS… where is the growth to get away from the 40-60 underwater incumbent. Meh, if I looked at this, I’d say Bruce Rauner failed… - Das Opinionator - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:22 am: “A real leader like J.B.”. Or Madigan himself, or a plate of mashed parsnips. We’re ready for nearly anyone else (except IPI and their comments legion ). - Arsenal - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:23 am: Internal polls are only released if the party commissioning them likes them, but man, there’s a lot of corroboration here. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:26 am: News like this can cause a reasonable, logical, non-stigma-perpetuating, healthy mental state of “worry.” Did I say that okay? Maybe that slick new messaging team could run it by the state mental health director. - illini97 - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:27 am: I’m intrigued by that increase in “Excellent” ratings. What is that based on? This has to be the rabid commenters who fervently believe the billionaire is sticking it to the Chicago machine to protect the little guy in downstate Illinois. - Chicago Guy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:27 am: Too bad they couldn’t have a category - “worst governor in the history of Illinois.” I would have chosen that one. - Northside City Dweller - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:29 am: ==”These kinds of ratings create a plausible scenario of unenthused Republicans staying home and angry Democrats coming out in larger than expected numbers, which results in a wave across Illinois that will affect every candidate in 2018.”== Sounds a lot like the narrative Democrats pushed nationwide in 2016…just sayin’. - NeverPoliticallyCorrect - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:31 am: And the partisans are out early. Yes, Rauners numbers are lousy. Yes, he has done a poor job in almost every ways. But, yes the dems have done just a lousy job in Il, just for a longer period of time. An objective person might suggest that both parties have failed the general population almost completely. That what we need is a viable third party or new leaders on both sides. That we set clear priorities about the operations of this state and that those priorities focus of it’s citizens and not any certain special interest group. Yeah, I know-good luck seeing that happen. My prediction is that Rauner will be out and then the Dems will be back in total control and there will be no incentive for them to make any changes. We will continue to see our economy decline and our population diminish. But the state employee unions will keep getting their raises and retirement benefits. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:33 am: ===Sounds a lot like the narrative Democrats pushed nationwide in 2016=== Hillary won Illinois. Just sayin’ ===This has to be the… who fervently believe the billionaire is sticking it to the Chicago machine to protect the little guy in downstate Illinois.=== I think there’s a hardening of the positives that IPI and others are using, but what is the ceiling for that growth and hardening as the disapproval, including “Poor” increases. Is that hardening too? I dunno. That’s why my ask is… ===I dunno which is the tougher climb, the less than 40% on approval, or whittling down the disapproval from the 60+%.=== Where is that room to move both? - Anotheretiree - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:34 am: Don’t get over confident..it will still take a strong candidate (one who tucks in shirts) to overcome 50+ million… - Piece of Work - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:36 am: Ah, polling. We all know how that turned out last November. - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:36 am: ===Rauner is on track to be an albatross around the neck of GOP candidates up and down the ballot.=== Governor Albatross. GA members take note. As the Beetles say, “…Money can’t buy you love.” - Epic - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:38 am: @Northside city dweller Democrats were no where near as angry back then as they are now. Also Rauner does not have the electoral college to hide behind if he loses the popular vote. Illinois Democrats just need to remind there supporters that there’s more to vote for then presidential elections. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:38 am: ===We all know how that turned out last November.=== RCP polling average was Clinton +3.3. She won the popular vote by just a point less, 2.1. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:39 am: Did Hillary lose Illinois and I missed that? If Hillary lost Illinois and I missed that that’s on me… - Arsenal - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:43 am: ==RCP polling average was Clinton +3.3. She won the popular vote by just a point less, 2.1.== Piggy-backing: MI and WI were underpolled, but what polls there were did show big late movement toward Trump. - lake county democrat - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:47 am: Democrats would be very wise to indeed consider the 2016 Presidential election. Donald Trump’s poll numbers were terrible too - in a vacuum. Now I doubt that Rauner has the kind of “Reverse Bradley Effect” support that Trump had or that any of the leading Dem candidates have Hillary-like liabilities. Hillary Clinton underperformed in Illinois, a state which unlike Michigan and Wisconsin Trump made no effort to win (and which, bizarrely, Hillary put significant resources to win in the thoughts she was going to run up her popular vote total in addition to the electoral college). Also, those poll numbers are with Rauner making pretty much every mistake you can think of in the last several months. His performance will likely get better (it can’t get worse…wait, strike that). Julie Morrison is the canary in the coal mine for Democrats, and the income tax and assorted local tax hikes haven’t even happened yet. There’s a long way to go… - Hamlet's Ghost - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:50 am: JB ain’t HRC - Arsenal - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:51 am: ==and which, bizarrely, Hillary put significant resources to win== She had like, 3 staffers, and all they did was organize bus trips to Iowa. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:52 am: When a win by a margin of 16.8% is underperforming… #Huh? - ChicagoVinny - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:00 am: Given that Trump is collecting failed midwestern GOP governors (Pence, now Brownback), maybe he should give Rauner a call? - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:00 am: ===Donald Trump’s poll numbers were terrible too=== Not the best argument you can make. You want that as a headline? lol - ILGOV2018 - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:06 am: During the 2006 mid-term, didn’t the Illinois GOP (long before Rauner bought the party) lose seats in both houses of the legislature? - lake county democrat - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:12 am: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hillary-clinton-trump-232547 So yes, they were hoping for more. And even with those resources and the lack of any significant opposition here, running against the allegedly exponentially more unpopular and radical Republican opponent, Hillary Clinton got fewer votes than Barack Obama. Admittedly some of that you’d expect given President Obama’s popularity with African-American voters, but overall turnout was higher for the election. And African-American support appears to at least be a potential weakness for the Dem establishment’s candidate. #Yeahthatsright - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:14 am: Rauner is not running for governor of Michigan. - The Dude Abides - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:16 am: Piece of Work, There’s no Electoral Vote for Illinois, it’s popular vote. Sorry. - lake county democrat - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:16 am: Rich - if the argument is “Democrats, don’t put *too* much stock in this poll” then yes, I’m fine with that headline! - Arsenal - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:17 am: I don’t see the reference to Illinois in that article. And I mean, I think everyone expected Clinton to underperform Obama in Illinois. ‘Cause, y’know, this was his home state and all. - lake county democrat - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:19 am: Michigan isn’t the point. –Politico reports that there “were millions approved for transfer from Clinton’s campaign for use by the DNC — which, under a plan devised by Brazile to drum up urban turnout out of fear that Trump would win the popular vote while losing the electoral vote, got dumped into Chicago and New Orleans, far from anywhere that would have made a difference in the election.– - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:21 am: “Don’t you know how outrageous that is?” - lake county democrat - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:22 am: Arsenal - I’m not sure “home state” is where the expectation came from (see Al Gore’s success in Tennessee for example) but for the total vote count you might have expected the increase voter turnout overall to make up for that. Regardless, can we agree that it wouldn’t *hurt* the Democrats not to get too comfortable with these poll numbers? - Arsenal - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:22 am: OK, Politico reports. Good for them. Problem is, all the Clinton campaign did with that cash in IL was gather up volunteers to send to Iowa. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:23 am: The article is about Michigan. Illinois isn’t Michigan. - Arsenal - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:29 am: == (see Al Gore’s success in Tennessee for example) == But that was considered a pretty big black mark on Al Gore’s reputation as a candidate. It’s pretty common for a nominee to goose their party’s numbers in their home states. Guys like Gore and Trump are outliers, not the norm. ==Regardless, can we agree that it wouldn’t *hurt* the Democrats not to get too comfortable with these poll numbers?== Sure, if only because “Generic Democrat” usually translates as “Democratic Jesus” to poll respondents (maybe the Madigan of it all changes that in IL, I dunno). But you’re gilding the lily with all this talk of Clinton investing in IL. - Will Caskey - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:44 am: My takeaway from this is less the bad absolute numbers (Quinn DID recover from lower in 2010) than that they’re pretty stable over six months. Speaks to deeper and more resilient disapproval than temporary spikes from current events. It’s definitely the point at which an incumbent has to drop all positive messaging and focus on suppression-level negatives on his opponents (and I’m not talking about Madigan). - Real - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:51 am: Why do people keep saying look at 2016? In 2016 Clinton won in Illinois. In 2016 Clinton won the popular vote. Trump won by a man made electoral college.Every political election in this country is won by popular vote except the presidential election. - Blue dog dem - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:58 am: Of the 50% voter turnout expected. Who will turn out their troops. - Captain Illini - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 10:58 am: Real: Every political election in this country is won by popular vote except the presidential election. With respect, but every election in this country is won by following the Constitution and laws of each state - which includes the electoral college…all of which are “man made”…just sayin’ - Real - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 11:06 am: Captain Illini The electoral college is a man made system. At the end of the day Clinton won the popular vote so stop saying look at 2016. O Popular vote is more democratic in that the voters choose the candidate. With the electoral college a man made system picks the candidate. Big difference. - forwhatitsworth - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 11:31 am: I’m shocked by two stats in this poll. How could Rauner’s disapproval rate be at only 63% when he has done absolutely nothing to make IL a better state and how could he have a 8% excellent stat? - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 11:36 am: Who are those 8%? Family members? - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 11:41 am: Name one single thing that has improved in ILlinois under this governor. - Mr. Smith - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 1:30 pm: (With apologies to Mssrs. Edwards and Stone) “A second flood, a simple famine, Plagues of locusts everywhere, Or a cataclysmic eathquake I’d accept with some despair. But no - you sent us Rauner. Good God, sir, was that fair? - independent thinker - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 1:32 pm: The Rauner administration has not had the corruption that past administrations have…that is a big improvement. - ste_with_a_v_en - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 2:13 pm: Everyone is looking to 2016 as a reference point, but it seems 2005 would be a better spot. Wasn’t Blago dead in the water a year out? - ste_with_a_v_en - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 2:14 pm: http://capitolfax.blogspot.com/2005/05/weekend-column.html#comments Looking back - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 2:15 pm: ===Wasn’t Blago dead in the water a year out? === He had the national winds firmly at his back in 2006. It was a huge Democratic year. Congress flipped back Dem, Senate Dems became a super majority here, etc. If you think 2018 will be a huge Republican year during a currently unpopular Republican president’s first midterm, well, then you have a point. Otherwise… no. - ste_with_a_v_en - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 2:36 pm: Good point. I just don’t see a huge Dem surge on the horizon either. - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 2:40 pm: The only thing anyone can come up with that is seen as an improvement in this state during Rauner’s tenure is that he hasn’t had any corruption scandals? That’s it? Are people so willing to settle for seeing their state destroyed because they personally aren’t bothered by it? They don’t have a child headed to college, or a family member who isn’t being demonized by this man? They don’t have any need for any service that’s been cut? Really? Just because it’s not in your backyard you don’t give a hoot? I guess his demination hasn’t gone far enough then. - IllinoisBoi - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 2:40 pm: ==I’m intrigued by that increase in “Excellent” ratings. What is that based on?== A few of the less rabid Raunerites rallying to the flag, in desperation? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 2:44 pm: ===Good point. I just don’t see a huge Dem surge on the horizon either.=== Really? Huh. Don’t get outside much? - ste_with_a_v_en - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 2:57 pm: “Really? Huh. Don’t get outside much?” See 0/4 in elections since Trump won. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 3:01 pm: ===See 0/4 in elections since Trump won.=== Hmm. Georgia, South Carolina, Montana, Kansas. Who won those states in 2016 Who won Illinois in 2016? - ArchPundit - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 3:11 pm: ======See 0/4 in elections since Trump won.=== 15 point swing on average in those same congressional seats from November Congressional race. None of them should have been competitive. It’s true we’ll have to see where the motivation numbers are in the winter and spring, but with a Republican President averaging a mid to high 30s approval and a Republican Governor doing the same…what do you think will happen? We all suffer from motivated reasoning to some degree, but c’mon here people. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 3:15 pm: Central to Illinois, Right now ~3 out of 5 polled “disapprove” of Rauner. Right now ~2 out of 5 polled “approve” of Rauner. If it’s a turnout election, a higher turnout with those negative numbers, today, that’s not too great. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 3:27 pm: ==I’m intrigued by that increase in “Excellent” ratings. What is that based on?== They dialed the IPI cats who are now thinkin’ on the taxpayer dime. - ste_with_a_v_en - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 3:41 pm: “15 point swing on average in those same congressional seats from November Congressional race. None of them should have been competitive.” Almost winning isn’t winning. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 3:48 pm: None of those races were in Illinois… - ste_with_a_v_en - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 3:51 pm: “If it’s a turnout election, a higher turnout with those negative numbers, today, that’s not too great.” Yes, because midterm gubernatorial elections are known for their high turnout. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 3:54 pm: ===Yes, because midterm gubernatorial elections are known for their high turnout.=== It appears 3 out of 5 polled disapprove of Rauner. “Pat Quinn failed” proved one thing, when people see a failed governor, they want that governor “out” - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 3:59 pm: A poll against an unnamed Democratic candidate who has the exact same policies of the most unpopular politician in Illinois (Speaker Madigan) 16 months before an election and the 300 million dollars in media is spent is completely meaningless. Do you expect a poll commissioned by the Democratic Governor’s Association to be positive for an incumbent Republican Governor? I don’t think any polls predicted Governor Rauner to win last time either. Last year had to be the worst year on record for pollsters all across the world. Pollsters got Brexit, the National Senate races, some even had the Democrats taking over the House not to mention the consensus opinion Trump had zero chance to win the nomination or the Presidency. - ste_with_a_v_en - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 4:02 pm: “Pat Quinn failed” proved one thing, when you argue to increase taxes in an election year, they want that governor “out”. Fixed it for you. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 4:06 pm: - Lucky Pierre - LOL… Did you see “But, but, but… Madigan” Cracks me up every time. Polls said Hillary would win Illinois, she won What about Mendoza? She won, sure, but… Rauner is losing everywhere, has no budget, has to live now with “Rauner vetoed that” at every state university, social service, road project, as Rauner said, he vetoed the budget. Rauner vetoed the budget “in its entirety” So, no budget. Too bad. “Rauner vetoed that”. Bruce Rauner fails. 3 out of 5 polled… Agree. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 4:09 pm: - ste_with_a_v_en - “Rauner vetoed that” everywhere he goes… Schools, universities, social services… Even Diana’s “Ounce”… Rauner vetoed all that. That’ll work, lol. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 4:10 pm: ===”Pat Quinn failed” proved one thing, when you argue to increase taxes in an election year, they want that governor “out”. So you’re saying… Pat Quinn failed. That’s what this poll is saying. Bruve Rauner fails… - ste_with_av_en - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 4:45 pm: Hmm, you know, that might work. That permanent tax increase? “Rauner vetoed that” That budget that doesn’t tackle the real problems? “Rauner vetoed that” Thats what people will remember. Feel free to advise JB to go into detail. Let him explain. You know what they say when you’re explaining? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 4:51 pm: ===That budget that doesn’t tackle the real problems?=== So Rauner having NO signed budgets… is “good”, lol Kinda vague when a state university not having its funding because “Rauner vetoed that” really frames the overrides well. Don’t you worry about Pritzker, or Biss, or even Kennedy. No one is looking for me for any answers. I’m here with you. Lucky you. - ArchPundit - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 6:04 pm: ===Thats what people will remember. Why don’t they remember it now? ====Almost winning isn’t winning. Let’s think through this though–Dems are overperforming in every district, but all are safe districts. What happens in the less safe districts? - ArchPundit - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 6:10 pm: ==== some even had the Democrats taking over the Hous What poll? Please name that one. ===Trump had zero chance to win the nomination or the Presidency. Not the polling, the pundits. Nate Silver gave him a 20-30% chance of winning based on the polling overall. ===Pollsters got Brexit Within the margin or error and the last 10 days had mixed results You confuse pundits with polls. There is a big difference due to motivated reasoning. We all do it, but some more than others. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 7:43 pm: Rauner is running to be reelected. That’s completely different than Trump in 2016. Rauner failed. He has a record filled with lies and failure. No one but the die-hard anti Democrats has given up on Rauner. I didn’t need a poll to feel a Trump win last year. I don’t need a poll to feel a Rauner loss next year. Stop looking for that pony in the Rauner mountain of BS. Stop offering excuses. Rauner doesn’t deserve reelection. Everyone know it. There’s a group who just doesn’t want the Democrats back. Tough. Rauner blew it. You know it. Case closed. - Property of IDOC - Thursday, Jul 27, 17 @ 9:32 pm: Rich, please repost this article daily-until November. Thanks Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.